China indicated his place

The International Arbitration Court rejected the territorial claims of the PRC in the South China Sea

The International Arbitration Court in The Hague inflicted a sensitive defeat of China, ruled that its claims of 86 percent of the water area of the South China Sea have no historical grounds. Not a single international instance has yet passed such an authoritative and unambiguous legal conclusion regarding the territorial claims of the PRC, which was first announced back in 1947. China, however, defiantly refused to participate in the meetings of the Hague arbitration, did not intend to recognize its competence, as he did not intend to submit to the decision made. If we recall that China has joined the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea and that the decisions of the arbitration court in the Hague are mandatory and final for all members of the Convention, then the position that was occupied in Beijing casts doubt on his readiness to play according to the rules and, in this case, in all other acute situations in world politics.

The dispute received the beautiful name "9-Punctic line". To be geometrically accurate, we are talking about nine segments of the parabolic curve, which covers a huge part of the South China Sea, including areas, significantly distant from Chinese coasts. Inside the parabola there are controversial objects - atolls, natural or artificial (embankments) islands created by China in groups of Archipelago Tskotli and the Parasel Islands , as well as the RIF of Skarboro, near which Beijing was initially disturbed by the drilling of shelf oil wells, and four years ago completely took the reef from the Filipinos; It was Manila who initiated a lawsuit against China in the International Arbitration Court.

Joint military exercises of the United States and Philippines in the South China Sea. Autumn 2015

Other states from among close neighbors who do not recognize the territorial claims of China, Vietnam, Malaysia, Brunei, Indonesia; And they can now follow the example of the Philippines. The exclusive rights to atolls, however, did not proclaim not Beijing, but Taibey, China only accepted the baton from Taiwan, and Taiwan dismissed the decision of the Hague court as arrogantly as the PRC.

China unilaterally established an exclusive economic zone around the atolls a width of two hundred sea miles around the atolls, which theoretically admits the convention on the law. The Convention, however, states that an exceptional zone can be created only around actually or, at worst, potentially inhabited islands. According to the decree of the Hague arbitration, the contested atolls and reefs do not correspond to such a status, and therefore any conversations about the two -hundredth fence are legally insolvent, no matter who this land belongs. Therefore, the court found that it makes no sense to argue about the nationality of these territories. And that China violated the right of the Philippines to oil exploration and fishing, and at the same time the convention itself. In the same way, the court rejected Beijing’s arguments that the fishing that the Chinese fishermen once led around is a precedent in a modern context.

China will not sacrifice its requirements only because disagreement with the decision of the Hague court can damage its reputation

Like the ships of the Chinese coastal guard, despite the legal subtleties, systematically squeeze out of the indicated zone in the South China Sea of others' trading and fishing vessels, so at one time they replaced Japanese crafts from the waters of the East Chinese Sea around the disputed island of Senkaku (or, as the Chinese call it, Dyaoyudao). At the atolls and reefs, the Chinese are engaged in land reclamation, creating the appearance that they will be populated by peaceful workers, but in fact they turn them into military fortified points, placing aircraft, anti -ship missile systems and air defense systems. The "great sandy wall" half -jokingly christened these embankments by the commander of the US armed forces in the Pacific Ocean Admiral Harry B. Harris. Beijing’s attitude towards international law is commented by the analyst of the Heritage Research Foundation Dan Chen:

- The Chinese recognize the presence of such an essence as the international legal community, but do not believe that its rules are applicable to them in this case. Why? Because for them the question of the sovereign affiliation of the islands is resolved finally and irrevocably. Of course, by themselves. China participated in the development of the Convention on Marine Law and ratified it. But in principle, China rejects arbitration as a way of resolving disputed issues if it has no confidence that the decision will be made, so to speak, “correct” and “objective”. The West is deeply mistaken if he thinks that China reads international law as consistently as himself, and maybe his partner in establishing a world order based on the rule of law, whether in the field of international trade or obligations to combat global warming, says Dan Jong.

Chinese coastal ship near the islands of Svtli. 2016

Speaking about global warming, environmental organizations pay special attention to the fact that China in the Hague was found guilty of violating the environmental part of the convention on the law, which consisted in the destruction of natural coral reefs and the erection of embankments in their place. As commentators recall, not only China, but other members of the UN Security Council are far from always obeying international justice. In the 80s, Nicaragua sued the United States for mining her ports. The court found America guilty and ordered her to pay a fine, which was not done. Along the way, the head of the American delegation at the UN described the international court as a "politicized structure, the services of which participating countries have the right to resort or not to resort at their discretion." Russia also actually behaved in the incident with the capture of the Dutch ship Arctic Sunrise in 2013. Last year, the Hague arbitration found the UK guilty of violating the Marine Convention for the establishment of a flora and fauna protection zone in the area of the Chagos archipelago in the Indian Ocean; London left this decision without attention. "International law is written for small powers," noted the famous political scientist Graham Allison and quoted the ancient Greek historian Fukidid: "The strong requires what he considers possible to demand, the weak is forced to obey."

If you move from the legal region to the geopolitical, many analysts in both Russia and the West see the important reason for Putin’s aggressive policy in the inability of the regime to achieve visible economic successes. China, in turn, also conducts aggressive, if not expansionist, foreign policy, but at the same time demonstrates impressive results on the economic front. Maybe it's not about the economy? Dan Chen continues:

Economic factors affect the foreign policy of Moscow to a lesser extent than the policy of China

- No, I don’t think the Chinese see themselves as an expansionist power. Their policy can be called "muscular." Russia behaves much more aggressively. Of course, both countries conduct different economic courses and link the economy and politics in different ways. The PRC at Dan Xiaopine made a bet on economic liberalization, the USSR under Gorbachev - for political restructuring. Russia's economy is still purely raw materials. Therefore, in my opinion, economic factors affect the foreign policy of Moscow to a lesser extent than the policy of China, which attracts foreign investment in the development of infrastructure within the country and, as a leading exporter, thoroughly built into the system of international division of labor. China for today the main holder of American state debt; US Treasury bonds are the most reliable of assets for him. It is not profitable to depreciate this asset, going into foreign policy adventures. In a word, China has something to lose if he tries to overturn the prevailing world order. I know that the First World War broke out, despite the closest economic ties that existed between the warring powers. Nevertheless, the territorial claims of China seem to me scanty. China does not turn the eyes towards the western part of the Pacific Ocean and does not insist on revising the borders of the Republics of Central Asia. While Putin repeats about the artificiality of Kazakhstan, not to mention what he does in Crimea and in the east of Ukraine, Dan Jong recalls.

The representative of the Philippines who filed a complaint against China demonstrates the decision of the International Arbitration Court in the Hague

American military analysts do not believe that Pearl Harbor’s script is sudden, up to the war, the aggravation of American-Chinese relations is realistic. The scenario of the "August guns", that is, is little aware of the participants, as in August 1914, and therefore inexorable and gradual sliding into the abyss inspires more fear.

What will China will do now in response to the decision of the Hague court, which he tried to discredit for so long and consistently? Will increase the number of aircraft deployed on the contested islands? Will expand the scale of the reclamation carried out in the Scarborough Reef, what will be regarded as a flagrant provocation? After all, Xi Jinping promised to Washington not to carry out further militarization of bulk objects, which, incidentally, does not at all prevent Beijing from doing this on the contested natural islands. Maybe the PRC will try to block the Philippine marines deployed on one of the atolls, which can also lead to armed clashes with the United States, which have a mutual defense agreement with the Philippines? Or will he create a “air defense identification zone” in the sky over the South China Sea, a flight through which civil and military vessels will be prohibited without the prior sanction of the Chinese command? Exactly this China did in 2013 in airspace over the East China Sea. Then the Pentagon immediately sent his aircraft into a breakthrough through the zone. The flight was agreed in advance with the White House and therefore did not require a separate permit. In military circles at that time, fears were expressed that if such a request had come to the White House, then they would be refused in permission to maneuver.

How now Pentagon to respond to Peking's power demarches?

And how is Pentagon now to answer the power demarches of Beijing? Reason for diplomacy, that the aggressive steps of Beijing will disavow his peace -loving statements and only even more unite his opponents? If the military department is relied only on exhortations, then the need for the rallying of the Allies soon disappears with the allies themselves. Or does the Pentagon make sense to encourage the Philippines and Vietnam to symmetrical steps to create their artificial areas at the disputed water area? It is noteworthy that recently the Filipinos, under the guise of American drones, landed on the ship, which they deliberately landed in the area of Svtli back in 1999. Dan Chen's opinion:

- China will not sacrifice its requirements only because disagreement with the decision of the Hague court can cause damage to its reputation. I now foresee the intensification of Chinese propaganda, which will repeat that Beijing’s position in the islands is absolutely correct, that the Hague arbitration is biased to China and so on. The reaction of China also depends to a certain extent on how the Philippines behave, and the actions of the Philippines, in turn, are the function of their assessment of the firmness of Washington's position. Yes, and European capitals.

Anti -Chinese demonstration in Manila. February 2016

The Obama administration, which proclaimed a historical turn from Europe and the Middle East to Asia, continues Dan Jong , behaves not very consistently in relation to China, combining sedative statements to his address and purely symbolic military measures or even half measures with large -scale joint military exercises with the main rivals of the PRC in the person of Japan and India. Conversely, the administration is quite capable of reducing or completely suspended the patrol of the US Navy in the controversial areas of the South China Sea. Or, as now, to resume them is not clear, it is true, for what time, in anticipation of the reaction of China to the decision of the Hague court. Therefore, the new President of the Philippine Rodrigo Duterte Roa hesitates along with the Washington line, sending the Beijing rulers either sharp signals, then ingratiatingly cowardly, containing calls for restraint and prudence. ASEAN as an organization also often grazes before Beijing. If China is now committing something warlike, then is it interesting whether at least one ambassador of the Ontilland country is withdrawn homely home? Will invitations sent to the participation of at least one international conference sent to the Chinese scientist?

View of artificial islands washed by China in the South China Sea

As Professor Tonio Andrad from the University of Emory, China, like Russia, looks at the current conflicts with the West and its allies through the historical prism, seeing in them the logical continuation of past insults and insults. It is charged with opponents by the desire to deprive China of a place that suits it in the world's tables that suits it at all costs. The Philippines - Beijing is convinced in this one hundred percent - they appealed to the Hague court only on the teaching of the United States. At the same time, China, again, like Russia, declares the exceptional peace of its policy. "China never waged aggressive wars and never captured a centimeter of someone else's land. We, Chinese, love the world," he often repeats Xi Jinping. - No matter how our power has grown, we will not go an expansion and hegemonism course. " However, as historians are well aware of, yes, for sure, both the Chinese leader and the Ming dynasty in the 16th century, and the Qing dynasty in the XVIII century waged the aggressive wars, which made China an indisputable hegemon in East Asia. Professor Andrade also draws attention to the frequency of outbreaks of China's expansionism: they usually occur at the time of consolidation of power inside the country with each new dynasty in about forty to fifty years after its accession. Having strengthened, the emperors went into conquering campaigns in search of further security strengthening, which was always few, since supposedly China was always exclusively vulnerable to external enemies.

The commander of the US Armed Forces in the Pacific Ocean Admiral Harry B. Harris and the head of the General Staff of the PRC, General Fan Fenhway. Beijing, November 2015

Today, such enemies of Beijing are America with its fleet and numerous allies that can block the most important marine communications that connect China with importers of strategic raw materials and markets for domestic products. If China, of course, will not be the first to block access to their region. Hence the militarization of the islands. Only having reached the unconditional superiority in their region, or in the Celestial Kingdom, as the emperors were expressed, could they ensure a calm existence of their people. In other words, the expansion was a type of self -defense, a synonym for the struggle for peace.

In the American arsenal, of course, there remains a formidable weapon in the form of economic sanctions, which theoretically can be applied to China to reason it. In the eyes of the Obama administration, however, such a step can destroy the entire building of bilateral cooperation. Obama’s presidential rule is nearing completion, and starting a long -term quarrel with China, which he will not be able to settle before he leaves his position, the president who wants to stay in the memory of the people as a peacemaker does not want to.